The Bombay High Court today quashed and set aside a complaint against actor Salman Khan and his bodyguard Nawaz Shaikh, filed by a journalist who claimed that he was assaulted in 2019.
The Magistrate court allowed applications by the 2 against the order that issued a summons and initiated criminal proceedings against them in that case.
Journalist Ashok Pandey claimed that in April 2019, he, along with a camera person, tried to film Khan while the actor was cycling. The journalist alleged that though he had the bodyguards’ permission, they allegedly manhandled him and snatched his phone after Khan objected to the filming.
Furthermore, he alleged that the DN Nagar police had refused to file a complaint, after which he filed a private complaint before the magistrate, seeking criminal action against the actor and his bodyguard.
The high court stayed the proceedings on April 5 last year and continued from time to time.
A single-judge bench of Justice Bharati H Dangre concluded the hearing and reserved its orders in the plea by the actor and his bodyguard on March 21. Justice Dangre orally observed, “Let people have their own privacy, whether it is an actor, lawyer or judge. None of you is above the law. Neither an actor nor a press person. Even they are bound to follow the law.”
The applications in the high court by the duo had sought to quash and set aside the magistrate’s order and the complaint against the applicants.
In March last year, an Andheri magistrate court issued summons against Salman Khan and Nawaz Shaikh. It earlier called for a report from the police. The magistrate court stated that prima facie was sufficient to proceed against the two under sections 504 (intentional insult) and 506 (criminal intimidation) of the Indian penal code.
The journalist, in his affidavit filed through his lawyer Fazil Shaikh, stated that he immediately dispatched his complaint to the police and filed a second complaint later when they refused to take action. It was after being told by the police that there was no cognisable offence in the incident that the journalist approached the magistrate court.
However, according to the journalist, his police complaint described in detail how his phone had been snatched.
Senior advocate Aabad Ponda, represented the actor and stated that there were remarkable improvements in the journalist’s statements and stand taken by him.
While concluding the hearing, Justice Dangre also pointed out that the magistrate, while issuing summons, had not properly followed the procedures under sections 200 (verification) and 202 (police inquiry) of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) and that the “threat” required to constitute an offence of criminal intimidation was not present in the complaint.
“Applications are allowed,” Justice Dangre held on Thursday.
